Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BambuStudio has been violating PrusaSlicer AGPL license since their fork

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 172 posts

Re: BambuStudio has been violating PrusaSlicer AGPL license since their fork

#51

Post by BadBadJellyBean »

doginasuit wrote: post #21

[flagged]

Open Source was made by someone. With copyleft they decided: You can use my code, you can modify my code but if you build on my work you will also open source that.

Open Source is not necessarily a business decision but often a personal one. Often authors start without any pay but instead because they thought it was a nice thing they want to share. So it's their right to say what people can or can't do with their original work.

Companies have the ability to write their own software if they don't want to follow these rules.

Re: BambuStudio has been violating PrusaSlicer AGPL license since their fork

#52

Post by graemep »

karel-3d wrote: post #25

Can you just sue them over it? Sure they are a Chinese company but they also operate in Europe and US?

You can sue them if they have operations in a country you choose to sue in, or supply people in that country, or you can sue their importers and distributors. Maybe even marketplace sites if they sell through those.

Re: BambuStudio has been violating PrusaSlicer AGPL license since their fork

#53

Post by firesteelrain »

lnenad wrote: post #44
microtonal wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are underestimating how many companies use 3D printing for prototyping. It's not just hobbyists printing miniatures. To give an example, I had RSI and use a high-end, expensive ergonomic keyboard. The company that makes these keyboards does not go immediately from design idea to an expensive mold. There are many design iterations and prototypes and they are all 3D prints. The same is probably true for air…

I think you're overestimate the value of these prototypes. The print itself is either a plastic render of the final product without any value, or it's a shell without any actual useful parts/machinery. If we imagine we're talking about the 1% of 1% of 1% which could end up as useful IP stuff, but which might be very hard/impossible to find/understand/do anything with it, for which cases don't use bambu.

Chinese have made it part of their economy to steal the IP of US and Europe. It’s not unfathomable.

Re: BambuStudio has been violating PrusaSlicer AGPL license since their fork

#54

Post by tjoff »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #50
tjoff wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, just maybe, buy a printer that does not actively disrespect their users?

I guess it depends on what you value more highly, a machine from a company that respects intellectual property, or a machine that reliably prints parts without intervention.

Plenty of printers that do both.

Re: BambuStudio has been violating PrusaSlicer AGPL license since their fork

#55

Post by bix6 »

lnenad wrote: post #44
microtonal wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are underestimating how many companies use 3D printing for prototyping. It's not just hobbyists printing miniatures. To give an example, I had RSI and use a high-end, expensive ergonomic keyboard. The company that makes these keyboards does not go immediately from design idea to an expensive mold. There are many design iterations and prototypes and they are all 3D prints. The same is probably true for air…

I think you're overestimate the value of these prototypes. The print itself is either a plastic render of the final product without any value, or it's a shell without any actual useful parts/machinery. If we imagine we're talking about the 1% of 1% of 1% which could end up as useful IP stuff, but which might be very hard/impossible to find/understand/do anything with it, for which cases don't use bambu.

You’re severely underestimating the value of prototypes.

Re: BambuStudio has been violating PrusaSlicer AGPL license since their fork

#56

Post by pabs3 »

AshamedCaptain wrote: post #28
misswaterfairy wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Software Freedom Conservancy is at least fighting back. https://sfconservancy.org/news/2026/may/18/bambu-studio-3d-p...

I am annoyed that they just claim that "reverse engineering" will take care of this, instead of really trying to fight back legally. This is a social problem, and reverse engineering can only help up to a point.

They are likely pretty busy with their lawsuit against Vizio, which is going to trial in August and would set a very interesting precedent if won.

https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/vizio.html

Re: BambuStudio has been violating PrusaSlicer AGPL license since their fork

#57

Post by kiba »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #50
tjoff wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, just maybe, buy a printer that does not actively disrespect their users?

I guess it depends on what you value more highly, a machine from a company that respects intellectual property, or a machine that reliably prints parts without intervention.

Prusa work well. They're just expensive.

Re: BambuStudio has been violating PrusaSlicer AGPL license since their fork

#58

Post by iterateoften »

My_Name wrote: post #33

I use my printer to make prototypes for my business. There is no way in hell I'm sending them into the internet for some random to examine. I think my next printer will be mostly 3D printed, with a few generic parts like motor controllers, the odd bit of metal tubing, off the shelf bed levelling system, open source software etc. I only need single colour prints for work, and AFAIK the fastest printer on the planet is…

Going from Bambu to a self printed 3d printer I don't even think counts as the same category of devices. Bambu is concentrated on making a plug and play device that just works.

Re: BambuStudio has been violating PrusaSlicer AGPL license since their fork

#59

Post by bellowsgulch »

pocksuppet wrote: post #30
amazingamazing wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Xcancel is against the x terms of service. But no one really cares because it is not perceived as an issue, similar to this situation

Terms of service are not legally binding, copyright licenses are legally binding.

This is not universally true. Some, but not all, terms of service are explicitly a contract between the business and the user.
Post reply on HN